Degrowth

Course manual 2019/2020

Course content

The scientific concept of degrowth appeared in the academic literature in the 1970s and some of its principles have been part of philosophical debates for centuries. Only recently, however, has it appeared as an activist slogan. This rapidly rising movement proposes a purposeful downscaling of production and consumption that increases human well-being and enhances ecological conditions and social justice on the planet. In this course, students explore the scientific foundations and practical relevance of this challenging concept.

Objectives

• Recognise and distinguish key perspectives in the degrowth debate.
• Explain and evaluate degrowth arguments and practices for changing the growth-based economy.
• Interpret and examine processes of growth and degrowth by applying relevant conceptual and methodological frameworks.
• Develop and defend alternative approaches based on the principles of degrowth.

Teaching methods

• Lecture
• Seminar
• Self-study

Lectures contribute to objectives 1, 2, 3 and 4. Seminars contribute to objectives 2 and 3. Self-study contributes to objectives 3 and 4.

Learning activities

Attendance

Additional requirements for this course:

• The student may be absent in 2 out of 12 sessions (lectures and seminars).
• Absence needs to be communicated to the course coordinator (for lectures) and to the seminar coordinator (for seminars).

Assessment

Students that were enrolled in the course in previous years

Inspection of assessed work

Written feedback will be provided within 10 working days after submission. It will include general comments pertaining to the assessment criteria.

Assignments

Reviews:

The reviews will cover the reading(s) listed for each particular topic (in the weeks leading up to it) and available online through Canvas. The reviews should be between 900 and 1100 words each, no more no less. They will summarise key arguments from the literature (half the review) and make a concise and critical commentary (the other half of the review). Each review must identify student name and number at the top of the page. The completed review (.doc or .docx) must be uploaded on canvas before the start of each workshop (in week 48, 51 and 4)—any time after will be considered as a late submission. Late summaries will be subject to a penalty of 5% per day. No review will be accepted more than a week late. Failure to submit will result in a zero. Students must submit 3 reviews in total.

Assessment criteria: (1) All readings are covered. (2) The review includes a personal position. (3) Succinctness by distinguishing between essential and trivial information, capacity to summarise in compliance with word limit. (4) Clarity of understanding (by explaining) the subject matter, critical analysis and interpretation, especially in relation to points of contrast, limitations, contradictions and connections between the articles. (5) Logically organised, clear in thought and argument. (6) Higher marks are assigned to reviews that go beyond the listed articles for a particular unit and propose coherent arguments linked to other (optional) readings and lectures.

Written feedback will be provided within 10 working days after submission. It will include general comments pertaining to the assessment criteria. Each review will be graded individually (below 5.5 means a fail).

Essay:

Students will write an individual essay on one of the 'degrowth proposal' research questions listed in Videira et al. (2014:60, Table 1). Other questions can also be researched, but the student should discuss this with the course coordinator in advance. The essay should provide the background (why is it a relevant question), find cases that describe the ’degrowth proposal’ in question. It should include diagrams for the problem description and for the leverage point, using the tools of system dynamics (explained during the lectures, and applied in Videira et al. 2014). The essay should reflect on the type and effectiveness of leverage point (Meadows and Wright 2008). It should also reflect on cause-effect relationships with at least one other proposal (again, as in Videira 2014, Table 3) and on possible pathways (Videira 2014, Table 5).

The essay must clearly identify the chosen topic, student names and numbers, as well as word count. Length: 6000-7000 words (no more, no less, excluding references). Consistent use of APA or Harvard referencing style. A soft copy (.doc or .docx) should be handed in through Canvas in week 7. Late essays will be subject to a penalty of 5% per day. No report will be accepted more than a week late, without prior approval.

Assessment criteria: (1) Clear and up-to-date understanding of the chosen topic, as well as of the strengths and weaknesses of key concepts and practices for dealing with it. (2) Pertinent use of insights from course materials to contextualise and analyse the chosen topic. (3) Effective application of the system dynamics tools (causal loop diagrams, or optionally stock-flow diagrams). (4) Logically organised, clear in thought and argument.

Written feedback will be provided within 10 working days after submission. It will include general comments pertaining to the assessment criteria. It will also include a breakdown of the grade based on the assessment criteria. This grade is not compensable (below 5.5 means a fail). In case of a fail, the maximum grade for the improved version will be a 6.

Reference:

Videira, N., Schneider, F., Sekulova, F., & Kallis, G. (2014). Improving understanding on degrowth pathways: An exploratory study using collaborative causal models. Futures, 55(2014), 58-77.

Meadows, D. H., & Wright, D. (2008). Chapter 6: Leverage Points - Places to Intervene in a System. In Thinking in systems: a primer (p. 145-165). White River Junction, Vt.: Chelsea Green Pub.

Fraud and plagiarism

This course adheres to the general rules on ‘Fraud and Plagiarism` as set by the UvA. Students are expected to have familiarized themselves with these rules.

The terms Fraud or Plagiarism are to be interpreted as the copying of the work of peer-student and/or the copying of (scientific) sources of information, without explicitly referring to its source.

Fraud/plagiarism is forbidden and actively checked by staff. When one is suspected of having committed fraud/plagiarism, the exam committee of beta-gamma and future planet studies will be informed. The highest punishment for fraud/plagiarism involves the student to be disallowed to partake of any exams or examination activities within the future planet studies programme, for the duration of a whole academic year, or may even face dismissal from the programme. More information about Fraud and Plagiarism can be found at: www.uva.nl/plagiaat

Course structure

Timetable

The schedule for this course is published on DataNose.

Last year's course evaluation

In order to provide students some insight how we use the feedback of student evaluations to enhance the quality of education, we decided to include the table below in all course guides.

Contact information

Coordinator

• Crelis Rammelt

Staff

• Ties Temmink
• Jordy Willems